New evidence indicates that the USA has carried out unlawful killings in Pakistan through drone attacks, some of which could even amount to war crimes, Amnesty International said in a major new report released today.

It documents recent killings in Pakistan’s northwestern tribal areas and the almost complete absence of transparency around the US drone program.

“Secrecy surrounding the drones program gives the US administration a license to kill beyond the reach of the courts or basic standards of international law. It’s time for the USA to come clean about the drones program and hold those responsible for these violations to account,” said Mustafa Qadri, Amnesty International’s Pakistan Researcher.

“What hope for redress can there be for victims of drone attacks and their families when the USA won’t even acknowledge its

"As the story goes, a long, long, long time ago — way back in 2003 — there were these people called “Anti-War Liberals.” They were called “anti-war” because they were really, really, super-duper opposed to war. They believed in peace, you see? They didn’t think any country should be runnin’ around shootin’ and killin’ all willy nilly-like. These Anti-War Liberal folks knew that we had no right to be invadin’ another nation just to take its resources, or put a military base on its soil. They said we should mind our own got-danged business and stop interferin’ in them international type affairs. . ."

"But the Anti-War Liberals ain’t around no more. Perhaps they were all kidnapped by pirates or abducted by aliens. Or, another theory is that they’re just a bunch of cowardly fraudulent posers who never gave a crap about war in the first place."

Evaluating surveys of more than 5,300 anti-war protestors from 2007 to 2009, researchers discovered that the many protestors who self-identified as Democrats “withdrew from anti-war protests when the Democratic Party achieved electoral success” in the 2008 presidential election.

"As the story goes, a long, long, long time ago — way back in 2003 — there were these people called “Anti-War Liberals.” They were called “anti-war” because they were really, really, super-duper opposed to war. They believed in peace, you see? They didn’t think any country should be runnin’ around shootin’ and killin’ all willy nilly-like. These Anti-War Liberal folks knew that we had no right to be invadin’ another nation just to take its resources, or put a military base on its soil. They said we should mind our own got-danged business and stop interferin’ in them international type affairs. . ."

"But the Anti-War Liberals ain’t around no more. Perhaps they were all kidnapped by pirates or abducted by aliens. Or, another theory is that they’re just a bunch of cowardly fraudulent posers who never gave a crap about war in the first place."

Evaluating surveys of more than 5,300 anti-war protestors from 2007 to 2009, researchers discovered that the many protestors who self-identified as Democrats “withdrew from anti-war protests when the Democratic Party achieved electoral success” in the 2008 presidential election.

Try to apply your echo chamber cut-n-pastes to the right thread.

This one is about flying drones over Pakistan. Are you OK with it? Would it be OK if another country flew a drone through your neighborhood?

Libya, plus he threatened Syria with war until his stupidity was exposed and he had to back off. He also started our involvement in the Syrian civil war by providing Al Qaeda with weapons and training. No doubt there are "boots on the ground" in Syria.

On Feb. 17, 2009, less than a month after taking office, President Obama announced the deployment of 17,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, fulfilling his campaign promise to shift U.S. military forces to Afghanistan.

During a speech to cadets at the United States Military Academy (USMA), at West Point, on Dec. 1, 2009, President Obama announced an additional increase of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan. The president stated that “it is in our vital interest” to send the additional troops.

73% of U.S. Casualties in Afghanistan are on Obama's watch...even as a Senator , he totally supported Afghanistan as the necessary War after 9/11...

Libya, plus he threatened Syria with war until his stupidity was exposed and he had to back off. He also started our involvement in the Syrian civil war by providing Al Qaeda with weapons and training. No doubt there are "boots on the ground" in Syria.

He didn't start a war with Libya, he assisted by provinding aerial support. There was no war. And Syria didn't happen so that can't be an example because logic.

On Feb. 17, 2009, less than a month after taking office, President Obama announced the deployment of 17,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, fulfilling his campaign promise to shift U.S. military forces to Afghanistan.

During a speech to cadets at the United States Military Academy (USMA), at West Point, on Dec. 1, 2009, President Obama announced an additional increase of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan. The president stated that “it is in our vital interest” to send the additional troops.

73% of U.S. Casualties in Afghanistan are on Obama's watch...even as a Senator , he totally supported Afghanistan as the necessary War after 9/11...

So sending more troops to a war that started six years prior counts as "starting that war"? lol.

Dear UN and Amnesty International.......go pound sand.....if Obama or any US president orders an air strike anywhere on the planet....accept it ..we can do what we want...we are the United States of America,,,,,,I may not be an Obama fan but only Americans can criticize him....the US answers to nobody internationally and we explain our actions to nobody but oursleves...

Libya, plus he threatened Syria with war until his stupidity was exposed and he had to back off. He also started our involvement in the Syrian civil war by providing Al Qaeda with weapons and training. No doubt there are "boots on the ground" in Syria.

He didn't start a war with Libya, he assisted by provinding aerial support. There was no war. And Syria didn't happen so that can't be an example because logic.

There is a civil war in Syria. He didn't start that but he started our involvement in it. Libya was a war, it still is a war. Do you think that if Obama did not get usinvolved that the EUropeans would have done anything?

By your logic, Bush didn't start Iraq either. He was enforcing UN no-fly zone that was a result of the war Saddam Hussein started when he invaded Kuwait.

Strange - no casualty counts weither like we had when Bush was President.

War, killing of civilians and tactics are only bad if the POTUS has an R after his name!

That is the undeniable truth ! The 'useful anti-War idiots' were just pawns used by Democrats who told the useful idiots when to carry signs and protest, and then to "stifle it" after a Democrat was elected.